"boycott Always sanitary towels for removing the Venus logo"

RocketRaccoon · 23-10-2019 9:27am

Gynoid wrote: »

Why yes, yes they are. If you want to be made even stupider you will find that lots of autogynophilic males are sharing recipes online where they can simulate menstrual blood. There are even little things you can do ir take to mimic crankiness, pain, pmt etc. I truly wish the big lardy gimps could experience a few horrendous real periods.

I wish they'd **** off and die personally. They are of no benefit to our planet.

Gynoid · 23-10-2019 9:49am

Laurie Whining Tequila wrote: »

It's the other way around. Some individuals who were born as women, and still menstruate, have now decided that they are men.

As men who menstruate, they are offended by the "Venus symbol" printed on packaging, as such:

Whoops sorry yes, hard to keep track, its transmen really bleeding but wanting to be called blokes, and transwomen who are really blokes and wanting to be bleeding

Gynoid · 23-10-2019 9:52am

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

I wish they'd **** off and die personally. They are of no benefit to our planet.

Theres some benefit. Could have been a psyop to find out who were the people stupid enough to have gone along with it.

Sittingpretty · 23-10-2019 10:07am

Gynoid wrote: »

Why yes, yes they are. If you want to be made even stupider you will find that lots of autogynophilic males are sharing recipes online where they can simulate menstrual blood. There are even little things you can do ir take to mimic crankiness, pain, pmt etc. I truly wish the big lardy gimps could experience a few horrendous real periods.

You’re kidding surely?

One eyed Jack · 23-10-2019 10:35am

blueshade wrote: »

Gillette really misjudged that campaign and it cost them big time, ironically for them it seems to be mostly women who were annoyed by it than men. I know that Gillette products haven't been bought in our house since that advert and they never will be. It was just wrong and patronising on so many levels.

To be honest with you, I’d use Gillette if they were actually any good, but they’re not IMO, they’re shìte. I stopped using them years ago, and the only reason I ever used them in the first place is because they were the brand my old man used before he grew a beard. A silly advertising campaign wouldn’t stop me using a product if I thought it was doing the job. I don’t need it to make me a better man, I just need it to shave, and I was never satisfied with the shave I got using Gillette products, no matter how many blades or plastic they added to their products or how over-engineered they were.

blueshade wrote: »

These trans campaigns seem to be mostly non trans people pushing for really pointless things that only really achieve to annoy most people and will ultimately lead to a backlash against ordinary trans people who are just getting on with their day to day lives like the rest of the world. You can't make women second hand citizens and take away their rights in favour of men who identify as women and expect that to be OK.

As it was in the beginning, ever shall be, etc, etc. You’ll find that any minority of upstarts generally fit that description, whether it be black civil and political rights, gay civil and political rights, women’s political and civil rights, men’s political and civil rights, religious and non-religious political and civil rights, etc, you get the idea, and by that same token you’ll always hear from the people who say that it will ultimately lead to a backlash against ordinary people of whatever description. The great backlash never comes! Why? Because most ordinary people aren’t interested in identity politics and tend to treat people as they themselves are treated on an individual level. It’s only ever a minority of people who apply broad sweeping generalisations about other people based upon their identity.

Nobody is taking away women’s rights, women still have all the rights they had previously, all that’s happening is that people have rights they didn’t have before. Consider for example marriage equality - that didn’t take away any rights from anyone who was straight, it gave rights to people who didn’t have those rights before, and society didn’t fall apart at the seams - everyone simply carried on as before.

blueshade wrote: »

You can't say that the rights of a man who claims to identify as female take precedence over actual women. Which is what has happened, in sports, in public toilets and in a lot of other areas. It isn't that women feel threatened that trans men are going to attack them in toilets or changing rooms, it's that a tiny minority of people in the world, about 1%, now take precedence over the rest of us. Don't even get me started on people's preferred pronouns.

That hasn’t actually happened though. That tiny minority hasn’t taken precedence over anyone, it’s simply that their rights which weren’t recognised in law before, are now being recognised in law. Women’s rights aren’t being taken away, men’s rights aren’t being taken away, you still have the same rights you did yesterday as I do, and when the Gender Recognition Act was introduced in 2015 it didn’t take away anyone else’s rights - it recognised the rights of people who are transgender, and everyone carried on as before.

I won’t get you started on preferred pronouns because honestly as many people as I’ve known who are transgender, not one of them has ever introduced themselves by telling me their ‘preferred pronouns’, seems to be very much an online invention to wind people up. I’ve heard from one or two people alright that it’s a thing in some third level institutions in Ireland, but it’s like you said earlier - it’s mostly an idea being perpetuated by people who aren’t transgender, so I’m not going to treat people who are transgender as though they’re responsible for someone else’s nonsense. It’s that person who introduces themselves to me using their preferred pronouns’, or the person who expects me to use ‘preferred pronouns’ that I just won’t bother associating with.

Gynoid · 23-10-2019 11:31am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

To be honest with you, I’d use Gillette if they were actually any good, but they’re not IMO, they’re shìte. I stopped using them years ago, and the only reason I ever used them in the first place is because they were the brand my old man used before he grew a beard. A silly advertising campaign wouldn’t stop me using a product if I thought it was doing the job. I don’t need it to make me a better man, I just need it to shave, and I was never satisfied with the shave I got using Gillette products, no matter how many blades or plastic they added to their products or how over-engineered they were.

As it was in the beginning, ever shall be, etc, etc. You’ll find that any minority of upstarts generally fit that description, whether it be black civil and political rights, gay civil and political rights, women’s political and civil rights, men’s political and civil rights, religious and non-religious political and civil rights, etc, you get the idea, and by that same token you’ll always hear from the people who say that it will ultimately lead to a backlash against ordinary people of whatever description. The great backlash never comes! Why? Because most ordinary people aren’t interested in identity politics and tend to treat people as they themselves are treated on an individual level. It’s only ever a minority of people who apply broad sweeping generalisations about other people based upon their identity.

Nobody is taking away women’s rights, women still have all the rights they had previously, all that’s happening is that people have rights they didn’t have before. Consider for example marriage equality - that didn’t take away any rights from anyone who was straight, it gave rights to people who didn’t have those rights before, and society didn’t fall apart at the seams - everyone simply carried on as before.

That hasn’t actually happened though. That tiny minority hasn’t taken precedence over anyone, it’s simply that their rights which weren’t recognised in law before, are now being recognised in law. Women’s rights aren’t being taken away, men’s rights aren’t being taken away, you still have the same rights you did yesterday as I do, and when the Gender Recognition Act was introduced in 2015 it didn’t take away anyone else’s rights - it recognised the rights of people who are transgender, and everyone carried on as before.

I won’t get you started on preferred pronouns because honestly as many people as I’ve known who are transgender, not one of them has ever introduced themselves by telling me their ‘preferred pronouns’, seems to be very much an online invention to wind people up. I’ve heard from one or two people alright that it’s a thing in some third level institutions in Ireland, but it’s like you said earlier - it’s mostly an idea being perpetuated by people who aren’t transgender, so I’m not going to treat people who are transgender as though they’re responsible for someone else’s nonsense. It’s that person who introduces themselves to me using their preferred pronouns’, or the person who expects me to use ‘preferred pronouns’ that I just won’t bother associating with.

You are entirely incorrect. All previous civil rights movements did not involve others losing their rights. This one does. It requires the vast majority of people to subvert their reason and take on the idea that biological sex is not a reality but that gender identity is. Thus sex based rights will become meaningless, spaces, sports, etc. Crimes will be recorded as gender identity rendering the social science of criminology invalid, for example. So many other implications. But I think you are just amusing yourself playing devils advocate.

One eyed Jack · 23-10-2019 12:07pm

Gynoid wrote: »

You are entirely incorrect. All previous civil rights movements did not involve others losing their rights. This one does. It requires the vast majority of people to subvert their reason and take on the idea that biological sex is not a reality but that gender identity is.

The movement can demand that as much as it likes, they aren’t going to get it, because people can’t be forced to subvert their reason. Thought crimes are still not a thing.

Gynoid wrote: »

Thus sex based rights will become meaningless, spaces, sports, etc. Crimes will be recorded as gender identity rendering the social science of criminology invalid, for example. So many other implications.

Because your first statement is untrue, what follows from it above, is also untrue.

Gynoid wrote: »

But I think you are just amusing yourself playing devils advocate.

You’re free to think what you like, and if I thought I was answerable to you, I might be put out by your accusation in the same way as I’m supposed to give a damn when I’m accused of being transphobic because I disagree with someone else’s ideas. I’m not concerned with discussing people, which is why I generally don’t bother commenting on individual cases. I’m more concerned with discussing ideas, and to that end I can see merit in some ideas, like recognising the human rights of people who are transgender, and I can see no merit in other ideas, like ‘preferred pronouns’ nonsense.

As far as this idea of a private company making marketing decisions with the aim of increasing their profits, they’re not forcing anyone to buy their products, consumers retain the right to choose to either buy the products or not. I’m not an environmentalist either but it seems to me that consumer buying patterns are shifting towards more environmentally and economically sustainable products, and companies like P&G are responding to that trend in the only way it appears they know how - by trying to peddle their shìte products to a different market. I’m not going to lose any sleep over that tbh.

Boom_Bap · 23-10-2019 2:10pm

I prefer bodyform anyway

wwwwwwwooooooooooooooooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaoooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Bodyform

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asXw2a4kQLc

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 23-10-2019 2:15pm

Gynoid wrote: »

You are entirely incorrect. All previous civil rights movements did not involve others losing their rights. This one does. It requires the vast majority of people to subvert their reason and take on the idea that biological sex is not a reality but that gender identity is. Thus sex based rights will become meaningless, spaces, sports, etc. Crimes will be recorded as gender identity rendering the social science of criminology invalid, for example. So many other implications. But I think you are just amusing yourself playing devils advocate.

Uh huh.

blueshade · 23-10-2019 6:25pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

To be honest with you, I’d use Gillette if they were actually any good, but they’re not IMO, they’re shìte. I stopped using them years ago, and the only reason I ever used them in the first place is because they were the brand my old man used before he grew a beard. A silly advertising campaign wouldn’t stop me using a product if I thought it was doing the job. I don’t need it to make me a better man, I just need it to shave, and I was never satisfied with the shave I got using Gillette products, no matter how many blades or plastic they added to their products or how over-engineered they were.

As it was in the beginning, ever shall be, etc, etc. You’ll find that any minority of upstarts generally fit that description, whether it be black civil and political rights, gay civil and political rights, women’s political and civil rights, men’s political and civil rights, religious and non-religious political and civil rights, etc, you get the idea, and by that same token you’ll always hear from the people who say that it will ultimately lead to a backlash against ordinary people of whatever description. The great backlash never comes! Why? Because most ordinary people aren’t interested in identity politics and tend to treat people as they themselves are treated on an individual level. It’s only ever a minority of people who apply broad sweeping generalisations about other people based upon their identity.

Nobody is taking away women’s rights, women still have all the rights they had previously, all that’s happening is that people have rights they didn’t have before. Consider for example marriage equality - that didn’t take away any rights from anyone who was straight, it gave rights to people who didn’t have those rights before, and society didn’t fall apart at the seams - everyone simply carried on as before.

That hasn’t actually happened though. That tiny minority hasn’t taken precedence over anyone, it’s simply that their rights which weren’t recognised in law before, are now being recognised in law. Women’s rights aren’t being taken away, men’s rights aren’t being taken away, you still have the same rights you did yesterday as I do, and when the Gender Recognition Act was introduced in 2015 it didn’t take away anyone else’s rights - it recognised the rights of people who are transgender, and everyone carried on as before.

I won’t get you started on preferred pronouns because honestly as many people as I’ve known who are transgender, not one of them has ever introduced themselves by telling me their ‘preferred pronouns’, seems to be very much an online invention to wind people up. I’ve heard from one or two people alright that it’s a thing in some third level institutions in Ireland, but it’s like you said earlier - it’s mostly an idea being perpetuated by people who aren’t transgender, so I’m not going to treat people who are transgender as though they’re responsible for someone else’s nonsense. It’s that person who introduces themselves to me using their preferred pronouns’, or the person who expects me to use ‘preferred pronouns’ that I just won’t bother associating with.

My post stands. Women have been losing rights to men who identify as women. There were cases last summer in Britain were swimming areas that have always been for females only were challenged by men who identified as women and they were allowed access. Now I'm talking about swimming areas where women and girls swim naked. A place for women, not somewhere for some lad to whip his dick out. Men claiming to be women are allowed to compete in women's sports at a professional level despite having a physical advantage that is not in the interests of women.

More and more places are making women's toilets and changing rooms unisex, not because women want it, they don't, but because they don't want to offend a tiny minority of people who mostly don't want a fuss but to placate a bunch of bored entitled idiots who are permanently offended on other people's behalf and permanently attention whoring. You are seriously misinformed if you believe that women aren't being discriminated against in favour of men who claim to identify as women. Identity politics is behind a lot of things and the problem is that when something goes too far left it ends up going far right.

kildare lad · 24-10-2019 9:26am

It's a small vocal minority on Twitter and colleges pushing all this rubbish. They spend all day trying to find thing to be offended by. They're going nowhere in life and try and justify their sad existence by being a pain in the arse for everyone else. Then they go back to Twitter to be idolised by the few hundred other weirdos that that follow them. Sad c*nts

ToddyDoody · 24-10-2019 2:24pm

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

:pac:

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/world/many-vow-to-boycott-always-sanitary-towels-for-removing-venus-logo-in-response-to-trans-rights-campaigners/ar-AAJ6WT0?ocid=spartanntp

This world is mad :pac:

No, the world is sh*te.

Gynoid · 12-11-2019 9:12pm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_binding

Sprite have a new social media advert for Pride, in Argentina. Its gotten a bit of attention. It is quite cute in some ways.

But the second scenario is an older woman helping what seems to be their child strap themselves tightly into a binder.
A binder is a compression device some people wear to mask breasts.
A large study on binders showed that 97% of users suffer ill effects from binding, up to and including breathing difficulties which persist long after binding is stopped, broken ribs, permanently deformed torso, yeast infections, over heating, inability to exercise, and so on.
It seems weird to me that a global brand like Coca Cola would portray or even propagandise such an activity as endearing or even remotely appropriate.

https://youtu.be/8l_8yeYVlBo

Cant embed on phone.

"boycott Always sanitary towels for removing the Venus logo"

Comments